|
I really like the discussion about causally-possible foreknowledge and the nature of "will" and "will not" statements with respect to time. It really explains why people have always had problems with absolute EDF.
But it also explains why many Christians begin to think there is no logical way to think about those attributes of God that seem virtually necessary to them. This, in turn, causes them to think some truths aren't subject to the laws of logic. The process theists (or at least some of them), too, don't know how to conceive of God as being both perfectly benevolent AND perfectly omnipotent. So, to remain coherent, they can not conceive of the kind of power that we say God has.
In that sense, I don't see them as being any different than me. Until recently, I couldn't think of a way to conceive of perfect benevolence with perfect omnipotence (other open theists may have problems with conceiving of triunity). And I don't see why a philosopher would find much comfort in asserting both of these attributes if he/she can't conceive of both existing coherently.
Likewise, I still can not coherently account for how foreknowledge of all future contingencies can be eternal. This seems to entail the conscious apprehension of infinite contingencies in zero time. I don't know how any activity can occur in zero time any more than I can conceive of a circle with zero diameter. And I don't know how apprehension can be anything other than activity of some kind.
Thus, for now, I am content to believe as a minority of open theists believe--that God can know anything knowable if He chooses to. In this sense, it is analogous to omnipotence; God can do anything He can be motivated to do. But this will have to suffice for me until I can conceive of how eternal foreknowledge of all future contingencies can be logically conceivable.
In short, a philosopher can be doing legitimate analysis and still not see how it is possible for all the traditional perfections to exist in God. So I would consider some process theists as true open theists so long as 1) they are honestly trying to determine the attributes of God with all the intellectual means available to them and 2) they hold to the other claims of minimal open theism.
|